BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fairfield Connecticut

    License required for electrical and plumbing trades. No state license for general contracting, however, must register with the State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Florida’s Statute of Limitations / Repose for Actions Founded on Construction Improvement Modified

    Homebuilders Call for Housing Tax Incentives

    Premises Liability: Everything You Need to Know

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    No Coverage for Additional Insured

    Taking Advantage of New Tax Credits and Prevailing Wage Bonuses Under the Inflation Reduction Act for Clean Energy Construction Projects

    Do Engineers Owe a Duty to Third Parties?

    More on Duty to Defend a Subcontractor

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Fee Simple!

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Testing Your Nail Knowledge

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Illinois Joins the Pack on Defective Construction as an Occurrence

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Construction Legislation Likely to Take Effect July 1, 2020

    Chimney Collapses at South African Utility’s Unfinished $13 Billion Power Plant

    The New “White Collar” Exemption Regulations

    Housing Markets Continue to Improve

    Turkey to Start Building 200,000 Homes in March, Erdogan Says

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    Not a Waiver for All: Maryland Declines to Apply Subrogation Waiver to Subcontractors

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    Texas Allows Wide Scope for Certificate of Merit

    Traub Lieberman Team Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Client Under Florida’s Newly Implemented Summary Judgment Standard

    Mexico’s Construction Industry Posts First Expansion Since 2012

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    As Florence Eyes East Coast, Are You Looking At Your Insurance?

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Imposes Increased Disclosure Requirements On Defendants at the Beginning of Lawsuits

    No Signature, No Problem: Texas Court Holds Contractual Subrogation Waiver Still Enforceable

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    Loaded Boom of Burning Tower Crane Collapses in Manhattan, Injuring Six

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    Another Setback for the New Staten Island Courthouse

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Leonard Fadeeff v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    September 21, 2020 —
    In Fadeeff v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 50 Cal.App.5th 94 (May 22, 2020), the California Court of Appeal reversed the entry of summary judgment in favor of State Farm General Insurance Company (“State Farm”) in connection with a smoke and soot damage claim made by Leonard and Patricia Fadeeff (the “Fadeeffs”) for damage sustained by their home due to the 2015 Valley Fire. The parties’ dispute arose out of the Valley Fire, which took place in Lake County, California. The Fadeeffs’ home was located in Hidden Valley Lake. The Fadeeffs submitted a claim to State Farm under their homeowners policy. Initially, after an adjuster inspected the home and noted that it was “well maintained” with no apparent maintenance issues, State Farm made a series of payments and arranged for ServPro to clean the smoke and soot damage. Subsequently, the Fadeeffs retained an independent adjuster and submitted a supplemental claim in the amount of $75,000. State Farm retained a different unlicensed adjuster to investigate the claim and retained expert, Forensic Analytical Consulting Services (FACS) to inspect the Fadeeffs’ home, and another company referred to as HVACi, to inspect the Fadeeffs’ HVAC system. The independent adjuster used to investigate the Fadeeffs’ supplemental claim failed to follow company guidelines in connection with using experts, which required specific questions to be addressed by the expert. In addition, FACS only took surface samples of the walls in the Fadeeffs’ home. Ultimately, the reports prepared by FACS and HVACi concluded that no additional work was required to remediate the damage sustained by the Fadeeffs’ home. Thereafter, State Farm denied the Fadeeffs’ supplemental claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit with Additional Million

    April 03, 2013 —
    The southern New York town of Liberty has settled a lawsuit filed by the contractor with an agreement that the school district will pay an additional $1.1 million. Darlind Construction of LaGrangeville, New York had alleged that “errors, omissions, and other defects” in the plans provided to them required additional work. The school project had previously cost the town about $36 million. Darlind Construction’s initial claim had been for $1.6 million. Funds for the settlement will come from monies appropriated for the project, most of which were contributed by the State of New York. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    White House Proposal Returns to 1978 NEPA Review Procedures

    November 15, 2021 —
    Washington, D.C. (October 15, 2021) - The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has requested comments, by November 22, 2021, on proposed revisions to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations. The proposal is Phase I in a two-phased approach that will eventually undo a final rule, effective September 2020, that updated NEPA regulations to reflect decades of agency experience and caselaw interpreting the 1969 Act. Phase I proposes to reinstitute 1978 definitions for key terms used to determine the scope of review and the range of alternatives required when undertaking any major federal action. Phase II is expected to be an extensive rewrite of the 2020 regulations to incorporate climate change and environmental justice objectives. Businesses with projects, now or in the future, that require federal authorizations will need to pay close attention to these regulatory revisions. The 2020 update rule intended to scale back the time and cost of producing NEPA analyses by focusing agency resources on evaluating effects that are within the agency’s ability to control and studying only those alternatives that would meet the project purpose. CEQ’s proposal eliminates these efficiencies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Karen Bennett, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    April 29, 2024 —
    San Diego, Calif. (April 10, 2024) - California legislators have changed the rules of discovery in civil cases through the passage of amendments to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2016.090 and 2023.050, effective January 1, 2024. Section 2016.090 creates a new set of rules for civil litigators in cases filed on or after January 1, 2024, which permits any party to the litigation to demand initial disclosures be provided within 60-days. Such a demand can be made any time after a party has filed a responsive pleading, including a demurrer or motion to strike. Notably, this rule requires production of all information relevant to any causes of action that are pled at the time of the demand, meaning the parties may be required to disclose information related to claims that are being challenged on demurrer or a motion to strike, such as claims for punitive damages. This statute is only implicated when one of the parties to the action makes a demand and may be modified by stipulation of the parties. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Cuomo Proposes $1.7 Billion Property-Tax Break for New York

    January 14, 2015 —
    Governor Andrew Cuomo wants to give middle-class New Yorkers a $1.7 billion break on property taxes. The plan announced at Hofstra University on Long Island today would provide credits to more than 1 million homeowners and another 1 million renters. The plan, which will be included in Cuomo’s proposed budget next week, builds on his effort to control what he says are the nation’s highest property levies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Freeman Klopott, Bloomberg
    Mr. Klopott may be contacted at fklopott@bloomberg.net

    Crisis Averted! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Joins Other Courts in Finding that Covid-19 Presents No Physical Loss or Damage for Businesses

    October 21, 2024 —
    Seeking to find some relief from business losses experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, many businesses turned to their property insurers for coverage for their lost income. A clear national trend emerged among courts deciding the issue, as most businesses could not establish coverage because they had not experienced a “direct physical loss of or damage to their covered property” as required by most policies. While this legal question may have become an afterthought for many attorneys, the question remained an open one in Pennsylvania while the Pennsylvania Supreme Court considered two contradictory holdings issued in the Superior Court on this topic. Compare Macmiles, LLC v. Erie Ins. Exch., 286 A.3d 331 (Pa. Super. 2022) (holding there was no coverage for loss of use of a commercial property unaccompanied by any physical alteration or other physical condition that rendered the property unusable or uninhabitable) with Ungarean v. CNA, 286 A.3d 353 (Pa. Super. 2022) (holding that the policy at issue was ambiguous and therefore the policy covered the insured for COVID-related business losses). Last week, the Supreme Court considered the Superior Court’s holdings in Macmiles and Ungarean and held, at long last, that COVID-19 did not cause a direct physical loss of or damage to covered property. Reprinted courtesy of Edward M. Koch, White and Williams LLP and Marc L. Penchansky, White and Williams LLP Mr. Koch may be contacted at koche@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Penchansky may be contacted at penchanskym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hunton’s Geoffrey Fehling Confirmed to DC Bar Foundation’s Young Lawyers Network Leadership Council

    December 30, 2019 —
    Congratulations to Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP insurance recovery lawyer, Geoffrey Fehling, on his confirmation by the DC Bar Foundation’s Board of Directors to the organization’s Young Lawyers Network Leadership Council. As the leading funder of civil legal aid in the District of Columbia, DCBF awards grants to the District’s legal services organizations that provide free civil legal services to low-income and underserved people in the District. Since its inception, DCBF has awarded more than $80 million in grants. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth
    Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com

    White and Williams Elects Four Lawyers to Partnership, Promotes Six Associates to Counsel

    January 13, 2017 —
    White and Williams is pleased to announce the election of Edward Beitz, Justin Fortescue, Jennifer Santangelo and Amy Vulpio to the partnership and the promotion of Paul Briganti, Joshua Galante, Dana Spring Monzo, George Morrison, Craig O’Neill and Steven Urgo from associate to counsel. The newly elected partners and promoted counsel represent the wide array of practices that White and Williams offers its clients, including bankruptcy, corporate, finance, healthcare, insurance coverage, labor and employment, real estate and reinsurance. These lawyers have earned their elevations based on their contributions to the firm and their practices. “We are thrilled to elect these four lawyers to the partnership and promote six associates to counsel. These promotions are representative of the breadth of services and deep bench that we have to offer at White and Williams,” said Patti Santelle, Managing Partner. “The election of our new partners and promotion of our counsel is a reflection of their success and dedication as well as the continued health of the firm.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP